54

As a background, Ramanujan also gave a continued fraction for $\zeta(3)$ as

$\zeta(3) = 1+\cfrac{1}{u_1+\cfrac{1^3}{1+\cfrac{1^3}{u_2+\cfrac{2^3}{1+\cfrac{2^3}{u_3 + \ddots}}}}}\tag{1}$

where the sequence of $u_n$, starting with $n = 1$, is given by the linear function

$u_n = 4(2n-1) = 4, 12, 20, 28, \dots$

This has rather slow convergence. Using an approach similar to Apéry's of finding a faster converging version, I found via Mathematica that,

$\zeta(3) = \cfrac{6}{v_1 + \cfrac{1^3}{1 + \cfrac{1^3}{v_2 + \cfrac{2^3}{1 + \cfrac{2^3}{v_3 +\ddots}}}}}\tag{2}$

where the $v_n$ are now given by the cubic function

$v_n = 4(2n-1)^3 = 4, 108, 500, 1372, \dots$

Question: Can anyone prove that (2), with $v_n$ defined by the cubic function, is indeed true?

Postscript: A short description of Apéry's accelerated continued fractions for $\zeta(2)$ and $\zeta(3)$ is given here.

  • The following Mathematica code computes 2*len terms of cfrac. Apery2[len_] := Module[{res, vfun = 4 (2 # - 1)^3 &}, res = vfun[len + 1]; Do[res = vfun[k] + Divide[k^3, 1 + Divide[k^3, res]], {k, len, 1, -1}]; Divide[6, res]]. With this code I checked Apery2[330000] == N[Zeta[3], 10^6] gives True. Computation took about 6 minutes. – Sasha May 04 '12 at 19:40
  • 1
    Thanks, Sasha! I used a rather crude Mathematica code of looking for $v_n = an^3+bn^2+cn+d$ with unknown $(a,b,c,d)$. With a limited number of terms, its difference from $\zeta(3)$ was $10^{-50}$, several magnitudes MUCH less than the next best candidate which was $10^{-7}$. Hence I knew this polynomial had to be it. But a rigorous proof is still needed. – Tito Piezas III May 04 '12 at 20:07
  • @Tito Piezas III: this is one great result that deserves to land in the history books – Nicco May 22 '16 at 00:36
  • @Nicco: What would be nicer is if someone can find a similar cfrac for $\zeta(5)$. See, for example, this question I asked in the Mathematica forum. – Tito Piezas III May 22 '16 at 16:54
  • Can you provide any resource to learn about "approach similar to Apéry's of finding a faster converging version" to go from $u_n = 4(2n-1)$ to $v_n= 4(2n-1)^3$? – D.R. Jan 08 '24 at 05:42
  • 1
    @D.R. It's been about 12 years since this post, and I don't recall all the details. I do remember taking a quick look at Apery's paper and reasoning that if was able to accelerate Euler's continued fraction formula by using a cubic polynomial for the $b_n$, then maybe it was also possible to do so for Ramanujan's formula. So it was an approach by analogy. I was lucky that the coefficients were small enough since I did the search using Mathematica, and not from first principles. – Tito Piezas III Jan 09 '24 at 11:32
  • I'm also curious as to a source on the Ramanujan continued fraction. – D.R. Jan 14 '24 at 20:18
  • 1
    @D.R. You can find it in “Chapter 12 of Ramanujan’s Second Notebook” by Bruce Berndt. Back in 2010, I discussed it a bit in this article here https://web.archive.org/web/20230326021917/https://sites.google.com/site/tpiezas/0017 – Tito Piezas III Jan 15 '24 at 01:59

1 Answers1

28

Here's a nice little Mathematica routine for evaluating Tito's continued fraction with precision prec:

prec = 10^4;
y = N[4, prec];
c = y; d = 0; k = 1;
u = 1; v = y;
While[True,
 c = 1 + u/c; d = 1/(1 + u d);
 h = c*d; y *= h;
 v += 96 k^2 + 8;
 c = v + u/c; d = 1/(v + u d);
 h = c*d; y *= h;
 If[Abs[h - 1] <= 10^-prec, Break[]];
 u += 3 k (k + 1) + 1;
 k++];
6/y

where I used the Lentz-Thompson-Barnett method for the evaluation.

For prec = 10^4, the thing evaluates in 120 seconds (via AbsoluteTiming[]), giving a result that agrees with $\zeta(3)$ to 10,000 digits.

One can consider the even part of Tito's CF, which converges at twice the rate of the original:

$$\cfrac{6}{5-\cfrac{u_1}{v_1-\cfrac{u_2}{v_2-\cfrac{u_3}{v_3-\cdots}}}}$$

where

$$\begin{align*} u_k&=k^6\\ v_k&=(17k^2+17k+5)(2k+1) \end{align*}$$

Here's Mathematica code corresponding to this CF:

prec = 10^4;
y = N[5, prec];
c = y; d = 0; k = 1;
While[True,
 u = k^6;
 v = (2 k + 1) ((17 k + 17) k + 5);
 c = v - u/c; d = 1/(v - u d);
 h = c*d; y *= h;
 If[Abs[h - 1] <= 10^-prec, Break[]];
 k++];
6/y

For prec = 10^4, the thing evaluates in 70 seconds (via AbsoluteTiming[]). There may be further ways to accelerate the convergence of the CF, but I have yet to look into them.


Added, quite a bit later:

As it turns out, the even part I derived is precisely Apéry's CF for $\zeta(3)$ (thanks Américo!). Conversely put, Tito's CF is an extension of Apéry's CF. Here's how to derive Apéry's CF from Tito's CF (while proving convergence along the way).

We start from an equivalence transformation of Tito's CF. A general equivalence transformation of a CF

$$b_0+\cfrac{a_1}{b_1+\cfrac{a_2}{b_2+\cfrac{a_3}{b_3+\cdots}}}$$

with some sequence $\mu_k, k>0$ looks like this:

$$b_0+\cfrac{\mu_1 a_1}{\mu_1 b_1+\cfrac{\mu_1 \mu_2 a_2}{\mu_2 b_2+\cfrac{\mu_2 \mu_3 a_3}{\mu_3 b_3+\cdots}}}$$

Now, given a CF

$$b_0+\cfrac{a_1}{b_1+\cfrac{a_2}{b_2+\cdots}}$$

one can transform this into a CF of the form

$$b_0+\cfrac{w_1}{1+\cfrac{w_2}{1+\cdots}}$$

where $w_1=\dfrac{a_1}{b_1}$ and $w_k=\dfrac{a_k}{b_k b_{k-1}}$ for $k > 1$, where we used $\mu_k=\dfrac1{b_k}$. Applying this transformation to Tito's CF yields the CF

$$\cfrac{\frac32}{1+\cfrac{w_2}{1+\cfrac{w_3}{1+\cdots}}}$$

where $w_{2k}=\dfrac{k^3}{4(2k-1)^3}$ and $w_{2k+1}=\dfrac{k^3}{4(2k+1)^3}$. (You can easily demonstrate that this transformed CF and Tito's CF have identical convergents.)

At this point, we find that since the $w_k \leq\dfrac14$, we have convergence of the CF by Worpitzky's theorem.

Now, we move on to extracting the even part of this transformed CF. Recall that if a CF has the sequence of convergents

$$u_0=b_0,u_1=b_0+\cfrac{a_1}{b_1},u_2=b_0+\cfrac{a_1}{b_1+\cfrac{a_2}{b_2}},\dots$$

then the even part is the CF whose convergents are $u_0,u_2,u_4,\dots$ (Analogously, there is the odd part with the sequence of convergents $u_1,u_3,u_5,\dots$)

Now, given a CF of the form

$$b_0+\cfrac{w_1}{1+\cfrac{w_2}{1+\cdots}}$$

its even part is the CF

$$b_0+\cfrac{w_1}{1+w_2-\cfrac{w_2 w_3}{1+w_3+w_4-\cfrac{w_4 w_5}{1+w_5+w_6-\cdots}}}$$

Thus, the even part of the previously transformed CF is given by

$$\cfrac{\frac32}{\frac54-\cfrac{\beta_1}{\delta_1-\cfrac{\beta_2}{\delta_2-\cdots}}}$$

where

$$\begin{align*} \beta_k&=\frac{k^3}{4(2k-1)^3}\frac{k^3}{4(2k+1)^3}=\frac{k^6}{16(2k-1)^3(2k+1)^3}\\ \delta_k&=1+\frac{k^3}{4(2k+1)^3}+\frac{(k+1)^3}{4(2k+1)^3}=\frac{17k^2+17k+5}{4(2k+1)^2} \end{align*}$$

We're almost there! We only need to perform another equivalence transformation, which I'll split into two steps to ease understanding. First, the easy one with $\mu_k=4$, which yields the CF

$$\cfrac{6}{5-\cfrac{16\beta_1}{4\delta_1-\cfrac{16\beta_2}{4\delta_2-\cdots}}}$$

The last step is to cancel out the odd integer denominators of the $\beta_k$ and $\delta_k$; to do this, we take $\mu_k=(2k+1)^3$; this finally yields the CF

$$\cfrac{6}{5-\cfrac{u_1}{v_1-\cfrac{u_2}{v_2-\cfrac{u_3}{v_3-\cdots}}}}$$

where

$$\begin{align*} u_k&=k^6\\ v_k&=(17k^2+17k+5)(2k+1) \end{align*}$$

and this is Apéry's CF.


For completeness, I present a formula for the odd part of Tito's CF, after some post-processing with a few equivalence transformations:

$$\zeta(3)=\frac32-\cfrac{81}{\lambda_1-\cfrac{\eta_1}{\lambda_2-\cfrac{\eta_2}{\lambda_3-\ddots}}}$$

where

$$\begin{align*} \eta_k&=4\times(4k^4+8k^3+k^2-3k)^3=4\times10^3,\,4\times126^3,\dots\\ \lambda_k&=8\times(68k^6-45k^4+12k^2-1)=8\times34,\,8\times3679,\dots \end{align*}$$

The formula is somewhat more complicated, and converges at the same rate as the even part.

  • 6
    Since $v_{k}=\left( 17k^{2}+17k+5\right) (2k+1)=34k^{3}+51k^{2}+27k+5$, this even part is exactly Apéry's continued fraction expansion for $\zeta (3)$

    $$\begin{equation} \zeta (3)=\dfrac{6}{5+\overset{\infty }{\underset{n=1}{\mathbb{K}}}\dfrac{-n^{6}}{34n^{3}+51n^{2}+27n+5}}, \end{equation}$$

    which can be found in section 7 of this van der Poorten's paper.

    – Américo Tavares May 05 '12 at 12:51
  • 2
    @Américo: I guess that completes the proof of convergence to $\zeta(3)$. As I said, it was derived from the CF Tito had; both the original CF and the even part converge, so they should converge to the same value. – J. M. ain't a mathematician May 05 '12 at 12:54
  • Right! Perhaps you might add the derivation of this even part. – Américo Tavares May 05 '12 at 12:56
  • Bah, that was tedious to write out in full. I hope it's useful... – J. M. ain't a mathematician May 05 '12 at 14:42
  • 1
    Thanks, J.M. Yes, it certainly was useful. I didn't realize one could derive Apery's cfrac from it! :-) – Tito Piezas III May 05 '12 at 15:01
  • Very good! (It is not easy). – Américo Tavares May 05 '12 at 15:46
  • 2
    Thanks Américo! I couldn't have made it complete without your comment... – J. M. ain't a mathematician May 05 '12 at 15:51
  • @J.M. I just realized you're from the Philippines too. :) – Tito Piezas III Nov 10 '16 at 14:56
  • @Tito, indeed I am in the Philippines. (I figured out you were also from this country many moons ago.) – J. M. ain't a mathematician Dec 09 '16 at 17:26
  • @J.M.: I made some minor aesthetic changes. :) – Tito Piezas III Mar 28 '17 at 06:06
  • I wonder if this can be modified to prove the two yet unproven cfracs for Apery constant found by Ramanujan machine: http://www.ramanujanmachine.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/zeta3.pdf (seems somehow similar, only last two are unproven) – Sil Apr 20 '21 at 19:00
  • @Sil Re your last comment: I think so, at least for the penultimate one. See here https://mathoverflow.net/a/425112. I think the method used in the quoted French article is pretty similar. (The team of Ramanujan machine is aware of that, but they don't update their site that often!) – Wolfgang Oct 06 '23 at 09:50
  • @Wolfgang Yea I am aware of that article, I sent the link to it to Ramanujan team 2 years ago (twice), they haven't been able to update their website since then and they still claim it's new and unproven - I find that very unprofessional behavior. I am not sure how the method in that article relates to this answer though, but I must admit I did not study it too thoroughly (and well it was in french so...). I'll check your MO link later on, thank you. – Sil Oct 06 '23 at 09:58
  • For the record: updated van der Poorten link for the first comment: http://pracownicy.uksw.edu.pl/mwolf/Poorten_MI_195_0.pdf – Wolfgang Oct 31 '23 at 08:53